In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 773
Online now 734 Record: 11761 (2/27/2012)
The Web's No. 1 forum for coverage and discussion of Terps sports
Visitor discussion of University of Maryland and college sports
A place for lively discussion for all other sports unrelated to Maryland athletics
Feedback for IMS and 247Sports
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
he said Spain & Greece, not "Europe".
Hey dude, I didn't mean to shit on you, so lemme pretend to empathize/reason with you before I ultimately shit on you again
Detroit Hustles Harder
Ron Paul. Real Talk.
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) warned Thursday that House leaders lacked credibility on the looming negotiations over tax rates and budget cuts, arguing that his colleagues were refusing to acknowledge the truth… that we are broke.
Yeah I heard some of that interview this morning. It's great that Ron Paul has left a legacy that will long outlast him. He has helped some like-minded people get elected to Washington, so the Ron Paul Effect is multiplying.
All the people getting a half per cent on their bank accounts (say hi to your mom and dad) say you're welcome. This is an off-the-book 'tax' the result of the Fed policy. Cheap borrowing by the Feds; someone is paying. There is no free lunch unless your Arsenal-like, then everything is free.
After their free lunch, they get up from the table and don't realize how much time it took to put the meal together and then don't even say THANKS.
Here's what you are missing. Bush's budget was roughly 2 trillion. Obama's roughly 4 trillion. He's gotten America hooked on this amount of spending and he doesn't want to back off.
Tax reform will not touch the deficit. It won't. Obama needs to cut north of 1 trillion in spending per year for STARTERS.
As for your Clinton era taxes. 3% difference in income tax. No it won't kill us, but it won't do shit either. That's a few billion dollars thrown at a trillion dollar problem. PLUS, cap gains taxes go UP 10% in 2013 under Obama. 15% to 25%. The DOW was liquidated 500 points after the election. Obama has been and seemingly continues to be economy poison.
Those that hold the money in this country will always be one step ahead of the gov't. If they come after it, the people will just sit on it.
in regards to government employment, it's not a matter of performance or not (I'm sure all the fed government workers are top performers). You are working for an entity whose operating revenues don't come remotely close to operating expenses. That's something that simply cannot continue.
Worse than sitting on it, I think they'll stampede to munis to avoid the cap gains and get some yields. This will encourage stupid states and cities to borrow even more to paper over their fiscal problems. That'll create the exploding bubble Meredith Whitney's been predicting for a couple years.
cap gains on munis are taxed as any other cap gains. It's the interest income that's tax-free. But yes I agree with your premise any change to the dividend tax rate could affect the muni markets
Thx for correcting. And I've been watching the flight from my div payers this week!
disagree, sorry. Bush tax cuts probably costs the treasury around $150B - $175B/year. Agreed? Something like that, I don't have the #s in front of me. You don't think that would make a huge difference? I said spending is the more important issue, but again, we are not going to pay off $17T in one year (or 20 years or probably ever until the old people die off). The goal, which would be perfectly fine for our future, is simply to lower the rate of the increase of the debt to less than GDP. You do that, your fiscal house is in order. So what kind of deficit would be acceptable? Obviously not $1T/year. But $400B-500B/year with the size of today's economy and budget? Probably ok. So increasing revenue by $175B/year is 33%+ of the way there. Do that, plus my medicare, SS and defense ideas and the problem is solved with pain on both sides of the aisle, but certainly not crippling pain either.
At the 4:44 mark he goes H.L. Mencken on democracy. Love it!
You have to have substantial tax reform AND substantial spending cuts (along with reforming government business practices). That's the only way to really make a go at the problem. Problem is reaching the compromise on that where side A agrees to give up the "no tax hike ever" pledge and side B agrees to massive needed reforms to soc. security, medicare, etc.
Agree, but it should also be pointed out that the stated goal re: revenues is simply that they need to increase, which doesn't necessarily mean an increase in tax rates. Not only are there numerous examples of lowered rates translating into increased revenue, but there are idiotic loopholes that can be closed that few people are going to cry over.
can you elaborate on the material loopholes that are driving down revenues that people won't cry over cutting?
Oh, I get it...this is where you get to puff your chest out about knowing more than I do about material loopholes.
you posted that we can cut loopholes, was just asking which ones you are talking about? I guess I'm the bad guy by actually asking a follow-up question. Which ones were you talking about?
Don't you know? THE loopholes!
FWIW, I'd like to know too, because removing stuff like the mortgage interest/real estate tax credits is basically just raising taxes on the middle class. I know that one was mentioned by Romney (capping it at least).
No it's OK, I just wanted to point out that your post was the financial equivalent of Kunal asking me for my legal opinion. I'm being set up, but here goes...
On a basic level you can put a limit on deductions for people who make X, like mortgage deduction and things like that. Obviously the people getting hit by that are going to hate it, but like I said, most people aren't going to complain if, say, you stop mortgage deductions for houses that cost over $1 million, or (insert figure here).
Likewise, you can do the same sort of thing for corporate taxes. Leave deductions and credits in place for businesses that are smaller than X, but block them for bigger corps.
Yeah, capping is a good way to make it palatable...you're keeping the progressive taxation philosophy, making the wealthy pay more, but not raising rates.
This post was edited by frode 17 months ago
But will/is public perception still going to consider that a "tax hike"? Will what's-his-name the anti-tax lobbyist guy let politicians off the hook for doing it?
This post was edited by bkmalik 17 months ago
Yeah, that's always an issue (and I assume you're thinking of Norquist).
I think capping deductions is the best solution because it's essentially a compromise. The big sensation in the tax debate is what income tax rates are, but that's obviously not the real problem.
You know, like the tax credit for shipping jobs overseas loophole.
America is on a fast downward spiral, it was nice while it last brosephimos
Over/under for the number of days Congress spends in session working on this between now and 12/31/12?
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports